Subject: Re:MSFT wizard & Privacy From: Rex Ballard Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 17:38:24 -0400 (EDT)
How the Web Was Won
Subject: Re:MSFT wizard & Privacy From: Rex Ballard Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 17:38:24 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <950612192239_93530243@aol.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Mon, 12 Jun 1995 CybrMdaGrp@aol.com wrote:

> Dave & Jacqui wrote:
> >>>When I registered my Mac fax software a year or so ago (it came bundled
> with my Supra 14.4 modem), it had an option to fax your system contents as
> well. It was a checkbox that was otherwise unexplained. If you didn't do a
> page preview, you wouldn't know that it was sending a listing of the entire
> contents of your system folder to the folks who wrote FaxSTF.
> 
> This isn't new. But it is becoming an issue since the company doing is
> Microsoft.<<<
> 
> There's a BIG difference here.  FaxSTF needs to know your system
> configuration, inits, cdevs, rdevs, extensions, etc. to properly troubleshoot
> very tricky connectivity  & printing problems.  The info only gets called up
> when you call in for tech support. OTOH, MSFT will get your entire hard
> disk(s) contents, and they will actively and proactively analyze it
> everywhich way for tech support, market research, anti-piracy, upgrade sales
> pitches and competitive upgrades.
> 
> One saving grace is that they won't be able to analyze your data files very
> well because of the stupid 8 character DOS-file naming system.  Imagine if
> this WAS being done on a Mac with 30-character filenames!  Yikes!

I guess you haven't read this yet.  Windows 95 will have 32 character 
filenames.  This will of course break pkzip, and practically every dos or 16
bit windows application that tries to open the filename given as a 32 byte
argument.  Still, MS-DOS/Windows has been needing an upgrade of file 
names for years.  Unfortunately, it's still broken into mandatory 29.3 with
suffixes in the last 3 bytes (which means most unix ported applications will
choke if you try to open ".login" or similar files).

Even if you dont understant the hieroglyphics of MS-DOS 8.3 files, Microsoft
will very quickly find out the names of any files you use.  All that 
unregistered shareware you almost never use - Microsoft will know about it.
All the goodies you got from the internet - Microsoft will know about it.
That liz.gif file, Microsoft will know about it.

With that information, I could make anyones life very interesting.  I 
could tell the shareware vendors about your copies, target upgrades that 
make Mosaic unusable (Forcing you to pay $50 for NetScape or the 
Microsoft "Word Browser"),  and even send a copy of liz.gif to your boss in
a Microsoft mail message from you.  After I've collected the money from the
credit card number you've given me, I can add Microsoft Worms that will 
make you think Netscape is buggy, that internet software is rediculously
slow (that sleep 300 helps), and that your bank is less than totally honest.

With a few dirty tricks, you would be buying microsoft software (because 
thats the only stuff that runs quickly), and using only microsoft 
financial services.  If you still don't fall in line, I can send your
boss some nasty letters (from you).

Remember, if Microsoft is the only company with access to the source 
code, they can stick anything they want into their foundation classes and 
you won't even know.  Your bulletin-board operator won't know that the 
PDF files that he can't read can be read by every Windows 95 user and happen 
to contain calling card numbers and credit card numbers/expiration dates.

With a bit of careful planning, Microsoft can even eliminate the need for 
government altogether.  If you even write a plan for something that would
be "disloyal", men in black uniforms could be given the contents of your
terrorist plans and coud take preemptive action.  It doesn't really matter
that you never wrote such letters, Microsoft will provide the decoding key
which proves that only you or Microsoft could have sent it.  Why would 
Microsoft lie (they of course are totally honest about product 
capabilities and release dates).

> ________________________________________________________
> Ken Lim, Chmn & Chief Futurist

	Rex Ballard
	Standard & Poor's/McGraw-Hill
	Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect
	the Management of the McGraw-Hill Companies.




From rballard@cnj.digex.net Tue Jun 27 18:35:24 1995
Status: O
X-Status: